Skip to main content
Glama

Read a side's log

logs
Read-only

Retrieve trailing lines from tModLoader log files, optionally filtered, to diagnose failed launches by reading current or previous run's entries.

Instructions

Tail one of tModLoader's logs, optionally filtered.

Args: name: Which log — see log_files for what this install actually has. client.log and server.log are the game; Launch.log and the environment-*.log pair are written by the launcher, which is where a run that died BEFORE the game started says why. previous: Read the run BEFORE this one. tModLoader zips the previous run's logs into Old/ when a new run starts, so after a failed launch and a retry the failure is in an archive and the live log belongs to the retry. contains: Keep only lines containing this substring, case-insensitively. Applied to the WHOLE log before the tail, so this returns the last N MATCHING lines rather than the matches among the last N. lines: How many trailing lines to return. Zero returns none; a negative count is refused rather than guessed at.

Useful when a launch fails: the reason is usually in a log and not in anything the trigger protocol can reach, because the game never got far enough to poll. Which is also why previous exists — the obvious thing to do after a failed launch is launch again, and that rotates the evidence.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoclient.log
linesNo
containsNo
previousNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.3

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the `contains` filter is applied to the whole log before tailing (so it returns the last N matching lines, not matches among the last N), and negative line counts are refused. It also explains the log rotation behavior that makes `previous` necessary. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a clear one-line summary, a parameter breakdown, and a usage rationale. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary, but every sentence earns its place: the parameter details are non-obvious and the launch-failure context is genuinely useful. The front-loaded summary makes the purpose immediately clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only log tool with 4 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers parameter semantics, the filtering behavior, and the real-world scenario where the tool matters. The only minor gap is that it doesn't describe the output format, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for that. The launch-failure context and log-rotation explanation make it complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It explains all four parameters: `name` (with concrete examples of which logs exist and what they contain), `previous` (with the rotation context), `contains` (with the case-insensitive whole-log behavior), and `lines` (with the zero/negative semantics). This is strong compensation for the schema's lack of descriptions, though it could be slightly more explicit about the default values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Tail one of tModLoader's logs') and immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by naming `log_files` for discovering available logs and `log_since`/`log_watch` as alternatives. It clearly states what the tool does and how it differs from related tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Useful when a launch fails' and explains why the log is the right place to look. It also explains the purpose of the `previous` parameter in the context of a failed launch followed by a retry, which is exactly the kind of when-to-use guidance an agent needs.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.